Top Law Schools

I'm very fortunate to have offers at both Skadden NY and Covington DC. I am interested in both DC and NY (work experience and family ties to both markets, went to college/grad school in both cities) and want to pursue litigation. Please let me know your thoughts!

no brainer: covington dc for litigation.

Not to hijack the thread. In a similar situation, but instead I am 50/50 on corp/lit. Thoughts?

Anonymous User wrote:Not to hijack the thread. In a similar situation, but instead I am 50/50 on corp/lit. Thoughts?

what does it mean to be 50/50 corp/lit?

you should have a clue at this point, they're very different

Sorry, should have clarified. I have some experience in lit but have found corp work interesting based on limited exposure to it. Would be interested in at least trying it before making a decision one way or the other.

Anonymous User wrote:Not to hijack the thread. In a similar situation, but instead I am 50/50 on corp/lit. Thoughts?

Take Skadden NY.

Anonymous User wrote:Sorry, should have clarified. I have some experience in lit but have found corp work interesting based on limited exposure to it. Would be interested in at least trying it before making a decision one way or the other.

i mean you kinda need to decide

cov dc would be much much much better than skadden for lit

skadden ny would be much much much much better for corp work

I think it would be silly to choose Skadden, but that's just me.

I would without a doubt head to Covington DC. If you "think you might like corporate work," do a corporate assignment during your summer - maybe you'll fall in love, in which case if you're competitive for somewhere like Covington DC (which you are), then large NY firms like Skadden will probably still be available as a 3L.

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. Everyone's points make sense. Is the knock against Skadden general size, quality of life, quality of assignments at a place that big, etc?

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. Everyone's points make sense. Is the knock against Skadden general size, quality of life, quality of assignments at a place that big, etc?

I didn't mean my comments to serve as a knock against Skadden, it's a great firm, obviously. I didn't apply in DC myself, but if I had, I would not pass up the chance to work at arguably the most well respected shop in that city (W&C notwithstanding). Especially if you are hedging lit. Skadden on the other hand is one of seven or eight strong NY firms with essentially comparable work.

If I was to draw a qualitative comparison, there would be some early exposure/training and QoL issues, although it would be a lie to say DC associates at top firms aren't pulling harsh hours too

sideroxylon wrote:cov dc would be much much much better than skadden for lit

jbagelboy wrote:. I didn't apply in DC myself, but if I had, I would not pass up the chance to work at arguably the most well respected shop in that city (W&C notwithstanding). Especially if you are hedging lit.

Uh, what are you guys talking about? Covington is hardly even considered among the top tier general litigation shops in D.C., let alone nationwide. And for what it's worth, their "reputation," as measured by Vault and the like, is in large part attributable to their size. When you're probably the biggest firm in a city and at least twice the size of almost all of your competitors, of course more people will have heard of you. Not saying Cov is shit or anything, but the idea that they're the class of D.C. in all practice areas like the tippy-top NYC firms are is not reflective of reality. If OP was leaning towards regulatory work, then sure, Cov is a world-beater. But for litigation? Not even close.

Don't take my word for it though, go check chambers or a run news search for the biggest litigation matters they've handled in recent years and compare with the biggest cases run out of Skadden NY. The notion that Cov D.C. does more or better litigation than Skadden NYC is just wrong.